Sweet lowcut boots on clearance!

I just received a pair of these lowcut Madshus Tour Boots. They're 45%
off.

http://gearx.com/madshus-nnn-tour-boot-laceup.html

They seem very well made. Great torsionally stiff sole but nice
forward flex. They're quite unusual looking but whatever---a bit like
b-ball shoes! They're quite lightweight but seem substantial enough
for touring. They seem to be the only high-end lowcut boots out there
these days. (Maybe there's a cheapy 75mm lowcut.)

I like their normal, thick laces. I suppose speedlaces are the new
thing. I have several boots with them and seem to get mixed results
with slippage. I suppose race boots now have them---and they couldn't
tolerate slippage.

Everyone has gone to higher boots but why weren't they usually made
high in previous decades? Until the mid-80's only tele boots went over
ankle. I think it's because good classic technique needs maximum free
range of flex. I see that race boots have mostly lightweight stretch
stuff above the ankle which restricts motion less. I suppose ankle
coverage is good to keep snowing from balling up on socks and such in
long events. Anyway, low boots are lighter---and I really notice
weight on a long outing. I even ordered the model without the zip-
cover over the laces. I haven't ever had much problem with frozen
laces. In deeper snow people always used light cloth gaiters to
protect laces and ankles.

But here's more, maybe the biggest news: they seem like D or E width
with huge toe-box.

Lastly: that "BCX" binding bit seems like a typo---that's what the
shop guy thought. They're just NNN. They fit my bindings fine (haven't
skied with em yet though).

I've used hightops for the past 2 seasons and enjoy them well enough---
although I've REALLY noticed the new heavy weight of my heavier
plastic-cuffed Rossignol X7 combi boot and heavier Fischer Country
ski. Last year I used a cuffless zip-cover Rossi X3---it only seemed a
little heavier but its laces blew out. I might be willing to go to an
over-ankle design in exchange for a ton of stability and support if
the weight can be kept off. I'm actually also going to try a cuffless
Rossignol X1---the model with exposed laces. There seem to be 2 models
floating around that look quite different. Fingers crossed on this
one---the laces seem better anchored.

I recall a wonderful range of motion with my old Merrell lowcuts. They
were great for 10 years but in recent years they got really sloppy in
both sole and beak (old SNS bindings). I'm looking forward to trying
these fresh new Madshus NNN lowcuts! I suspect they'll give me totally
fine support---I think it mostly comes from the soles anyway. We'll
find out.

--JP outyourbackdoor.com

PS: Actually this new Madshus boot is pretty much a lowcut boot at the
back of it, by the heel, but like most boots today it sweeps upward
some to above-ankle height where the laces tie. So the front is an
inch taller than my old Merrells. It's still quite a bit lower than
today's typical high-end boot, though.

And I'd say it's a solid E width---very wide. Maybe a multiple of E's.
The wide part of the boot is 4 3/8" wide for my size 44's. My Rossi X7
44's are 4" wide. Exterior of Rossi's are 11" long; Madshus is 11.25".
So maybe they come a bit big in both width and length.

My feet are 43.5 D width and fit the Rossi 44's pretty good,
especially with 2 socks. The Madshus 44's were WAY too big and
wide---3 socks still didn't give a fit, so I'm trying a pair of 43's.

--JP

OK, I've tested the Madshus now in size 43---the inner liners are the
same size as Rossi's 44. It looks like they'll work out fine for me. A
short ski in my twist yard trail showed them to be just dandy and nice
and light. More testing soon! But note the sizing. ---JP

PS: I skied em an hour today in challenging terrain: perfect! Yay!
Light, supportive, total free range of motion. I am a happy camper
with these new boots.

Update: I RETRACT my endorsement of these boots. The upper "pleather"
material is fragile. It cracks and slices easily, especially where the
boot bends at the ball. I've been patching them with my new G-Flex
West Systems epoxy (I think it's the only flex epoxy out there---hot
new stuff).

Now, I ski really hard in rough conditions and I've made my other 2
pairs of recent boots fail in serious ways but that's no excuse.
(Rossi X3 laces and zipper; and X7 zipper.) I've had several other
pairs last for 10+ years in the same conditions with no problem.

Anyway, I still like the boots well enough (they're wide and light)
but the fragility is a big problem.

--JP

PS: I'd also update my review to say that these lowish boots are
better for firm trails and stable terrain. If you're skiing much
homebrew trail I suggest something with a low, light pivoting cuff---
it's a great innovation for stability without a penalty as long as
it's minimal. (Beware of taller, heavier combi boots, though, unless
you have steep, tricky terrain and won't be going out for very long.)
--JP